Transcript of Trump’s Speech on Jerusalem: A Deliberate Deception, with Added Analysis by Alexander Mercouris

I present first the transcript, with video, of US President Donald Trump’s historic speech of December 6, 2017, in which he announces America’s formal recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.

After that are a few remarks of my own in criticism of that speech, supporting the conclusion that Trump is attempting a deliberate deception of the public. At this task he fails.

There follows a scholarly analysis of the impact of Trump’s decision, complete with brief history of the ancient city and its meaning to various religions, by expert commentator Alexander Mercouris of The Duran.

[TRANSCRIPT] THE PRESIDENT: Thank you. When I came into office, I promised to look at the worlds challenges with open eyes and very fresh thinking. We cannot solve our problems by making the same failed assumptions and repeating the same failed strategies of the past. Old challenges demand new approaches.

My announcement today marks the beginning of a new approach to conflict between Israel and the Palestinians.

In 1995, Congress adopted the Jerusalem Embassy Act, urging the federal government to relocate the American embassy to Jerusalem and to recognize that that city — and so importantly — is Israels capital. This act passed Congress by an overwhelming bipartisan majority and was reaffirmed by a unanimous vote of the Senate only six months ago.

Click for video.Trump’s speech on Jerusalem, December 6, 2017

Yet, for over 20 years, every previous American president has exercised the laws waiver, refusing to move the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem or to recognize Jerusalem as Israels capital city. Presidents issued these waivers under the belief that delaying the recognition of Jerusalem would advance the cause of peace. Some say they lacked courage, but they made their best judgments based on facts as they understood them at the time.

Nevertheless, the record is in. After more than two decades of waivers, we are no closer to a lasting peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians. It would be folly to assume that repeating the exact same formula would now produce a different or better result. Therefore, I have determined that it is time to officially recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.

While previous presidents have made this a major campaign promise, they failed to deliver. Today, I am delivering. I’ve judged this course of action to be in the best interests of the United States of America and the pursuit of peace between Israel and the Palestinians. This is a long-overdue step to advance the peace process and to work towards a lasting agreement.

Israel is a sovereign nation with the right like every other sovereign nation to determine its own capital. Acknowledging this as a fact is a necessary condition for achieving peace.

It was 70 years ago that the United States, under President Truman, recognized the State of Israel. Ever since then, Israel has made its capital in the city of Jerusalem — the capital the Jewish people established in ancient times. Today, Jerusalem is the seat of the modern Israeli government. It is the home of the Israeli parliament, the Knesset, as well as the Israeli Supreme Court. It is the location of the official residence of the Prime Minister and the President. It is the headquarters of many government ministries.

For decades, visiting American presidents, secretaries of state, and military leaders have met their Israeli counterparts in Jerusalem, as I did on my trip to Israel earlier this year.

Jerusalem is not just the heart of three great religions, but it is now also the heart of one of the most successful democracies in the world. Over the past seven decades, the Israeli people have built a country where Jews, Muslims, and Christians, and people of all faiths are free to live and worship according to their conscience and according to their beliefs.

Jerusalem is today, and must remain, a place where Jews pray at the Western Wall, where Christians walk the Stations of the Cross, and where Muslims worship at Al-Aqsa Mosque.

However, through all of these years, presidents representing the United States have declined to officially recognize Jerusalem as Israels capital. In fact, we have declined to acknowledge any Israeli capital at all.

But today, we finally acknowledge the obvious: that Jerusalem is Israels capital. This is nothing more, or less, than a recognition of reality. It is also the right thing to do. It’s something that has to be done.

That is why, consistent with the Jerusalem Embassy Act, I am also directing the State Department to begin preparation to move the American embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. This will immediately begin the process of hiring architects, engineers, and planners, so that a new embassy, when completed, will be a magnificent tribute to peace.

In making these announcements, I also want to make one point very clear: This decision is not intended, in any way, to reflect a departure from our strong commitment to facilitate a lasting peace agreement. We want an agreement that is a great deal for the Israelis and a great deal for the Palestinians. We are not taking a position of any final status issues, including the specific boundaries of the Israeli sovereignty in Jerusalem, or the resolution of contested borders. Those questions are up to the parties involved.

The United States remains deeply committed to helping facilitate a peace agreement that is acceptable to both sides. I intend to do everything in my power to help forge such an agreement. Without question, Jerusalem is one of the most sensitive issues in those talks. The United States would support a two-state solution if agreed to by both sides.

In the meantime, I call on all parties to maintain the status quo at Jerusalem’s holy sites, including the Temple Mount, also known as Haram al-Sharif.

Above all, our greatest hope is for peace, the universal yearning in every human soul. With todays action, I reaffirm my administrations longstanding commitment to a future of peace and security for the region.

There will, of course, be disagreement and dissent regarding this announcement. But we are confident that ultimately, as we work through these disagreements, we will arrive at a peace and a place far greater in understanding and cooperation.

This sacred city should call forth the best in humanity, lifting our sights to what it is possible; not pulling us back and down to the old fights that have become so totally predictable. Peace is never beyond the grasp of those willing to reach.

So today, we call for calm, for moderation, and for the voices of tolerance to prevail over the purveyors of hate. Our children should inherit our love, not our conflicts.

I repeat the message I delivered at the historic and extraordinary summit in Saudi Arabia earlier this year: The Middle East is a region rich with culture, spirit, and history. Its people are brilliant, proud, and diverse, vibrant and strong. But the incredible future awaiting this region is held at bay by bloodshed, ignorance, and terror.

Vice President Pence will travel to the region in the coming days to reaffirm our commitment to work with partners throughout the Middle East to defeat radicalism that threatens the hopes and dreams of future generations.

It is time for the many who desire peace to expel the extremists from their midst. It is time for all civilized nations, and people, to respond to disagreement with reasoned debate – not violence.

And it is time for young and moderate voices all across the Middle East to claim for themselves a bright and beautiful future.

So today, let us rededicate ourselves to a path of mutual understanding and respect. Let us rethink old assumptions and open our hearts and minds to possible and possibilities. And finally, I ask the leaders of the region — political and religious; Israeli and Palestinian; Jewish and Christian and Muslim — to join us in the noble quest for lasting peace.

It goes without saying that I am, in general, a Trump supporter. Yet areas of disagreement about world affairs are becoming increasingly critical. His speech on Jerusalem is the most disingenous I have yet heard out of the billionaire’s mouth. His dishonesty is inexcusable.

The move to recognize Jerusalem is a slap in the face to the Palestinians, who warrant their full territory in accordance with UN mandates, and who deserve guaranteed sovereignty and freedom from Israeli oppression. In short, this is the worst decision Trump has made since the Tomahawk strike on Syria’s Shayrat air base.

The President says, paraphrasing Einstein, “We cannot solve our problems by making the same failed assumptions and repeating the same failed strategies of the past.” So what does Trump do? He not only makes the same failed assumptions of blind American obeisance to Israel, he also repeats and even amplifies the failed strategies of the past.

Trump goes on, “Presidents issued these waivers under the belief that delaying the recognition of Jerusalem would advance the cause of peace.” He then argues that, since peace has not been achieved, the strategy of delaying recognition of Jerusalem must be in error.

I propose an analogy using this faulty logic: If a farmer plows his fields and then drought destroys his crop, will ceasing to plow ensure next year’s rainfall? Surely the reason for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is not that Jerusalem was unrecognized as the Zionist capital! No, the reason lies in the fact that Israel’s very creation was a theft of Palestine, that Israel has failed to restore UN-mandated pre-1967 boundaries, and that Israeli authorities continue to harrass peaceful Palestinians.

Trump can’t fail to know this. Therefore his words are dishonest. He equivocates with the falacious argument, “It would be folly to assume that repeating the exact same formula would now produce a different or better result. Therefore, I have determined that it is time to officially recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.” The word therefore is the equivocal term. The second statement does not follow from the first, and the leap is designed to confuse. Good luck with that, Trump. Judging by world outcry, no one has been fooled.

Trump contends, “Israel is a sovereign nation with the right like every other sovereign nation to determine its own capital.” So, does China have a right to determine Tokyo as its capital? Jerusalem is not legally the sole property of Israel. More to the point, Israel is not a sovereign nation with any rights at all, until it abides by UN mandates, if even then.

Trump alleges, “Jerusalem is not just the heart of three great religions, but it is now also the heart of one of the most successful democracies in the world. Over the past seven decades, the Israeli people have built a country where Jews, Muslims, and Christians, and people of all faiths are free to live and worship according to their conscience and according to their beliefs.”

These are such preposterous lies it is hard to know where to begin. If Jerusalem is the heart of three great religions, then surely all three should have equal claim to it. Moreover, Israel, a criminal aggressor, appears to be a “successful democracy” only by virtue of theft and oppression—theft of water, homes, and territory, and oppression of the rightful inhabitants, who are the Palestinians. Are these people free to worship according to their conscience?

Trump’s speech begins with lies. The rest is therefore irrelevant, and in fact consists of deceptive platitudes.

And now, Mr. Mercouris:

Making Middle East Peace Impossible: Donald Trump and Jerusalem By Alexander Mercouris

President Trump’s decision – of which he informed Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas in a telephone call today – to move the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem has implications which too few people in the West and in the US especially recognise.

Jerusalem has hosted Israel’s government and parliament ever since the Israeli army took over formerly Jordanian controlled east Jerusalem during the 1967 Six Days War. In a sense moving the US embassy to Jerusalem simply recognises what has been the reality of the last fifty years.

That is however to ignore the huge symbolism of this step.

For Israelis – and for many Jewish people elsewhere – Jerusalem’s status as Israel’s capital is obvious and sacrosanct.

Jerusalem was the capital first of the united Kingdom of Israel and Judah following its capture by King David, and then of the Kingdom of Judah, until the sacking of the city by the Babylonians in 586 BC.

During this period the First Temple – destroyed by the Babylonians in 586 BC – was built in Jerusalem by David’s son Solomon. Jerusalem was then restored to Jewish control by the Persian King Cyrus the Great later in the sixth century, making it possible for the Second Temple to be built.

Though there were periods thereafter when Jerusalem was under the political control of the Greeks and Romans, the Second Temple – hugely increased in size by Herod the Great – continued to be the centre of Jewish worship until it was destroyed by the Romans in 70 AD.

Throughout this period Jerusalem remained the centre of the Jewish people’s religious, political and intellectual life.

A last attempt to regain control of Jerusalem and to rebuild the Temple was made in the Second Century AD by the Jewish rebel Simon Bar-Kokhba. However following the suppression of Bar-Kokhba’s revolt by the Romans Jerusalem fell successively under Roman, Byzantine, Muslim Arab, Crusader, Ottoman Turkish and eventually British control, until the establishment of the state of Israel in 1948.

Throughout this long period the Jewish people never forgot their connection to Jerusalem, which remains emotionally powerful for them to this day. Given the decisive importance of Jerusalem in forming the Jewish identity, it could not be otherwise.

Suffice to say that for the vast majority of Israelis and for most Jews a state of Israel which does not have Jerusalem as its capital is unthinkable, and the whole project of establishing a Jewish state on the territory of the former British Mandate of Palestine would make no sense without it.

This view is not held by Jews alone. Many evangelical Christians – especially in the US – who have been brought up on the Bible also share it. So do many secular people in the West. There is no doubt that Donald Trump is one of those people. Throughout his brief political career he has made know his deep affection for Israel and for the Jewish people, which has unquestionably been deepened by the marriage of his daughter Ivanka to Jared Kushner and her conversion to Judaism.

Beyond this there is unquestionably the political calculation that much of Donald Trump’s electoral support comes from evangelical Christians, who strongly support the recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.

It is very easy to see how a US President under the sort of political siege which Donald Trump has been placed under might wish to do something such as moving the US embassy to Jerusalem which he may well calculate will shore up the support of his electoral base.

The decision nonetheless is one which is fraught with dangerous implications, and which is both wrong and unwise.

Firstly – though this is something which will probably not concern Donald Trump or his supporters overmuch – recognising Jerusalem as Israel’s capital is contrary to international law. UN Security Council Resolutions 242 and 2334 leave no room for doubt about this.

Far more importantly, if the status of Jerusalem is a matter that is critically important for Israelis and Jews, it is also one which is critically important for Muslims and Arabs. The Prophet Muhammad in his lifetime already recognised Jerusalem as a Holy City in light of its association with the Biblical prophets – David, Solomon, Elijah and Jesus – who are recognised as prophets by Islam. Before Muhammad’s cleansing of the Ka’ba in Mecca, Jerusalem was the first Direction of Prayer for Muslims in Muhammad’s lifetime.

More importantly for Muslims, Jerusalem is the place where the Prophet Muhammad ascended to Heaven to speak with God, the prophets and the archangels.

The relevant authority for this in the Quran – which it is important to remember Muslims regard as the unmediated Word of God – is verse 17:1

Glory to Him Who carried His servant by night from the Sacred Masjid (ie. the Great Mosque in Mecca – AM) to the Furthest Masjid (the furthest mosque – AM), whose precincts We have blessed, to show him of Our wonders! He it is Who is All-Hearing, All-Seeing

That the location of the Furthest Masjid referred to in this verse is Jerusalem was according to Hadith (ie. Muhammad’s own teaching) confirmed by Muhammad himself.

Verse 17.1 of the Quran is held by Muslims to refer to what is known as the Night Journey (al-’Isrā’ wal-Mi‘rāj) whereby Muhammad was transported in a single day in the year 630 AD to Jerusalem by the miraculous steed Buraq, and from thence ascended to Heaven where he spoke with the archangels, the prophets and God before returning to earth. The place of Muhammad’s ascent is identified by Muslims as the Al-Aqsa mosque.

The Night Journey is one of the most important events for Muslims in the life of the Prophet, and is one of the most significant events in the Islamic Calendar. As result of the Night Journey Jerusalem is considered by Muslims to be the third holiest site (after Mecca and Medina) in Islam.

Beyond its religious significance for Muslims, for the Palestinian Arabs Jerusalem is their greatest city and the capital of the country – Palestine – to which they belong, and which ever since the fall of the Ottoman empire they have always aspired to create.

Recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital is therefore as emotionally offensive to Muslims and Arabs (especially Palestinian Arabs) and it is emotionally important for Israelis and Jews. Every single attempt to mediate a settlement of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict ever since the 1947 United Nations Partition Plan has recognised this fact.

That plan envisaged that Jerusalem would not become the capital of either Israel or of the Palestinian state that it proposed, but should instead be separately administered as a holy city important to Jews, Muslims and Christians under international control.

All other plans and proposals to negotiate a settlement of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict proposed since then have struggled with the issue of Jerusalem, which is recognised as the central and most intractable issue of the whole conflict.

It has always been understood that a peaceful end to the conflict is only possible if some mutually acceptable compromise over the status of Jerusalem can be agreed.

De facto recognition by the US of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, even if it only comes in the form of the physical relocation of the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, threatens to make achieving such a compromise impossible.

Given the enormous emotional pull of Jerusalem for Israelis and for the Jewish people, it now becomes all but impossible to see how they will ever accept a compromise on this issue given that the US – the world’s most powerful country – has now de facto recognised Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.

However de facto recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital now all but guarantees that whatever peace proposal is put forward which is acceptable to Israelis will be rejected by a critical mass of Muslims and Arabs.

Given the emotional and religious significance of Jerusalem for Muslims and Arabs, it is inconceivable that most of them will accept a peace proposal which leaves Jerusalem under Israeli control as Israel’s capital.

That all but guarantees that the Palestinian-Israeli conflict – and the conflict between Israel, the Arabs and the broader Muslim world – will continue indefinitely.

At best there may be periods of ‘cold peace’ ie. periods when the conflict goes into temporary remission. However as night follows day after every such period will end, with the conflict sooner or later flaring up again.

Beyond this there is the issue of the radicalisation this decision will cause across the Muslim world.

It is not generally acknowledged in the West, but the 1967 Six Days War and the capture by Israel of formerly Jordanian east Jerusalem was the watershed moment when radical political Islam began to take over from Arab nationalism as the dominant political movement in the Arab world and the Middle East.

For Muslims Israel’s capture in 1967 of the last remaining part of Jerusalem under Arab and Muslim control – including the territory of the Al-Aqsa mosque from whence the Prophet ascended to Heaven – was a profound shock.

Though it took some time for the effect of this to become visible – as such things always do – the rise of radical political Islam and eventually of violent Jihadism was the result.

De facto recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital is bound to give this process further impetus.

The immediate beneficiaries will not be the violent Jihadi groups such as Al-Qaeda and ISIS, who have shown no interest in fighting Israel, and whose atrocities have discredited them in Arab and Muslim eyes.

It will be Iran and Hezbollah: the Islamic Republic and the Muslim movement who have been the most consistent leaders of the so-called “Axis of Resistance” opposing Israel and the West.

In other words, at a time when the US and Israel and their allies have been seeking to reduce Iranian influence in the Middle East and the Arab world, Donald Trump has just taken a step which will make Iran’s popularity and its influence in the Middle East and the Arab world still greater.

Inevitably it is a step which will also undermine the position of those Arab leaders – first and foremost the Saudis – who are allies of the US.

Though these leaders have shown no interest in challenging Israel – on the contrary in the case of the Saudis they are in de facto alliance with it – the Arab and Muslim populations over which they rule are known to feel very differently. With the Middle East becoming increasingly unstable, with US influence diminishing, and with Iranian influence growing, Donald Trump has just taken a step which will make the lives of these leaders more difficult.

Lastly, it is very difficult to see how the US’s already threadbare reputation as an honest broker in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict can long survive this move.

As is always the case it will take some time for this to become apparent, but more and more Muslims and Arabs – including the leaders of the traditionally pro-US conservative Arab states – are going to struggle to explain to themselves how they can continue to accept the US as a mediator in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict when it has de facto recognised Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.

That will inevitably further reduce the US’s role in the peace process, and by extension its already diminishing influence in the Middle East.

All in all Donald Trump has just done both the US’s position in the Middle East and the long-term prospects of peace there major and possibly irretrievable damage.

News from Novorossiya

News from Novorossiya

Quemado institute Syria Page

How Did the Syrian Kurds Get Soviet Arms? - By Sophie Mangal - February 16, 2018 - A video showing Nour al-Din al-Zenki militants hijacking a tanker and a truck with smuggled arms and weapons ... CLICK TO READ MORE>>

Quemado Institute Syria Page

US supports Kurds in Syria: Turks react - By Mehmet Ersoy - January 27, 2018 - The Operation Olive Branch in northern Syria started five days ago. Five days ago the Afrin region became a possible hotbed of a full-scale . . . CLICK TO READ MORE>>

News from Novorossiya

The Silent War in the Donbas - Frontline Accounts of Volunteers Fighting in the Trenches - VIDEO by Vesti News - December 23, 2017

Meta

Blogroll

Censorship Looms Over European Union

Quemado Institute editor Karl Pomeroy received a legal threat today in response to a comment he posted on the Russia Insider website about the rise of the R********d banking family. The comment did not mention race, but was of historical content. The threatener accused Karl of “spreading Nazi propaganda,” then repeated the full text of the German Criminal Code Section 130, which outlaws inciting “hatred against a national, racial, religious group or a group defined by their ethnic origins,” which Karl’s comment did not do. A similar law, it was claimed, is now in force in 11 other European countries and carries a penalty of up to five years. The wording of the law is so vague, it could be applied to any criticism of those in power. If a political analyst can accidentally “violate” this totalitarian decree, there is no freedom of speech or press in Europe.